We can see Kish getting more and more desperate. Every time he is cornered, he makes up a new argument! Case in point:

Originally posted by Kish

A real easy question for someone who has an sincere answer; Why it is that Islam cannot provide a “Witness” testimony from within
the Quran but has to resort to the Hadith? I will tell you why, the
Quran is incomplete without it. Imagine that, someone Holy Book
incomplete. How much confidence can you have in an incomplete book? If
you need outside sources to complete your book, you’re way in danger,
that is something that your Mahdi on the white horse carrying black
flags cannot help you with.

Realizing that his pathetic "challenge" has once again been answered, he shifts gears and tries to deny the importance of the hadiths as well as launch an attack on the Quran's "completeness".

Regardless of your personal opinions, the simple fact is that you asked for witnesses and you got them! No amount of special pleading can help you weasel your way out.

Originally posted by Kish

But the problem with this is that Muhammad is expressly told to follow
and judge only by the inspiration which HE received, and what he
received was the Quran NOT the hadith:
And unto thee have We revealed the Scripture with the truth,
confirming whatever Scripture was before it, and a watcher over it. So
judge between them by that which Allah hath revealed, and follow not
their desires away from the truth which hath come unto thee… So judge
between them by that which Allah hath revealed, and follow not their
desires, but beware of them lest they seduce thee from some part of that
which Allah hath revealed unto thee… S. 5:48-49
. . . Say (O Muhammad): It is not for me to change it of my accord. I
only follow that which is inspired in me. Lo! if I disobey my Lord I
fear the retribution of an awful Day. S. 10:15
You follow your desires; even Shia Muslims dismiss some of its
contents as fabrications or untrustworthy due to the questionable
reliability of some narrators, conflicts with the Qur'an or character of
the Prophet of Islam.
So, not even all Muslims believe in the hadiths, and Muslims have
been divided since the existence of these books.
http://www.rim.org/muslim/hadith.htm
Unlike the Bible, the Quran cannot provide a single “witness” to
Muhammad’s revelations in which the religion of Islam stands on, a
serious blow!

Amazing! Another Christian wannabe scholar of Islam wants to tell Muslims what sources they can and cannot use! We can really see the desperation. Kish knows that he has no where to go, since he asked for witnesses and he got them. So what does he do? Instead of admitting like a good boy that his question was answered, he instead tries to do a little weaseling and attacks the hadiths instead!

Earth to Kish: the vast majority of Muslims rely on both the Quran and Hadiths. The Quran is a holy book, not a narrative on the life of Muhammad (pbuh). It is not like your Bible which goes on and on about things like who begat who. The Quran is instead concerned with teaching Muslims the importance of believing in Allah (swt) and His messengers. Other information is then filled in by the Hadiths, such as details about Muhammad's everyday life. In that is an example for Muslims to follow.

Originally posted by Kish

Just your Quran, can you do that?

Muslims follow both the Quran and Sunnah, Sheik Kish. You don't get to tell us what we can and cannot follow. There are far too many Kishes in the world who pretend they know enough to tell Muslims what to believe! You people are a dime a dozen!

So, back to the central topic. You asked for witnesses, and you got them. Now what? Your "witnesses" theory has already been shattered on numerous occasions. Now where will you go? Back to the drawing board?

Originally posted by Kish

Which means not one person heard what the LAST prophet
supposedly heard the last of the last prophets, right, and not any
witnesses like what Jesus or Paul experience, the very Prophets you and I
are discussing?

Eh, what? Is that English? Please rephrase because I have no idea what you are saying.

I am still waiting for you to present the "witnesses' that Jesus and Paul had. You have yet to name them. With Jesus, the best you could do was to refer to the verse where he named himself and God as witnesses.

Originally posted by Kish

Why you continue to put - 0 witnesses is beyond me unless you are still
stuck on the fact that no one eye-witnessed it, if so go to Webster’s
dictionary again and read what the definition of a witness is out aloud.
They all were confirmed an acknowledged by two or more witnesses in the
Bible.

Who were they? Name them! Why are you afraid of answering this question? Who were these "witnesses"? Who were the witnesses for Obadiah? Joel? Amos? Come on Kish...show a little backbone and answer the question! Are you a vertebrate or a squishy invertebrate?

Originally posted by Kish

n the Quran where are Muhammad’s witness testimonies? He did not have
any, which means that he is a self-proclaimed messenger of God which
carries no credentials at all.

Still clinging to your last desperate argument...tsk tsk tsk. I have already provided the witnesses. You best response was to try to determine for Muslims what they can and cannot use. Unfortunately for you, Muslims use both the Quran and Sunnah. Get over it! You wanted witnesses and you got them! Here they are again:

1. Bahira

2. Waraqah

3. Negus

On the other hand, I am still waiting after all this time for you to provide the names of witnesses for Paul as well as for the Biblical prophets.

Originally posted by Kish

Wow! It is true, you still have no idea what the word witness means so
here it is again . . .you really believe the person(s) has to be right
in front of your eyes to witness an event or testimony, like in the case
of Moses, Jesus, Paul etc. . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/witness

Oh Kish, where are thou? Either you can't read or you are ignoring your own evidence. I have already pointed this out, but why not do it again? The Wikipedia article states plainly:

The dictionary source also shows that a witness is someone who has perceived the event in question:"a. One who can give a firsthand account of something seen, heard, or experienced: a witness to the accident.

b. One who furnishes evidence.

2. Something that serves as evidence; a sign.

3. Law

a. One who is called on to testify before a court.

b. One who is called on to be present at a transaction in order to attest to what takes place.

c. One who signs one's name to a document for the purpose of attesting to its authenticity.

4. An attestation to a fact, statement, or event; testimony."

A witness is someone who can testify to the event in question. The only way that can be done is to give a "firsthand account of something seen, heard or experienced".

Now, that can mean a witness is someone who knows that something a prophet said came true or didn't come true. There lies Kish's problem because not only did the Biblical prophets not have any witnesses to back up their initial encounters with the divine, many of them also did not have witnesses for anything afterwards. Examples include Obadiah, Amos, Joel etc. It's no wonder that you have been trying to avoid answering my question about these prophets and who were their witnesses.

Originally posted by Kish

. . .and yet by definition of the word “WITNESS” Muhammad confirms the
Gospel account in his book the Quran that it was Gabriel that spoke to
Mary and Elizabeth all though he was not present with them.
A hearsay witness is one who testifies what someone else said or wrote.
This gets easier by the day. Now that Muhammad confirms/witnesses
the Gospel account of Mary and Elizabeth, who conforms the account of
Muhammad in the Quran?
Here is the quote of the day!

This is typical Kishian response! I am using your own theory to test whether the Bible's claims of individuals receiving divine revelation is true or not. You are the one who has been harping about witnesses! You were the one who claimed that all of the Bible's prophets have witnesses! When I showed that this is not true, you resort to the desperate argument that the Quran is their witness! Wow! So you believe in the Quran Kish? Are you a Muslim? SubhanAllah!

So, here is the question again:

Who was the "angel" that appeared to Mary to announce to her
the birth of Jesus (pbuh)? The Gospel of Luke states that it did not
identify clearly itself to Mary, but rather claims that it was Gabriel:"In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee,27 to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary.28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”" (Luke 1:26-28)

Use your own Bible to answer this question. This is your theory on the line. Be a man and back up your own theory!

Originally posted by Kish

Nope he does not get it yet! Islam, go get Webster’s dictionary from
upstairs, now! Because you and your Quran confirm the testimony to these
“minor” prophets just by giving them the credit as prophets, obviously
the Quran agrees that they are.

Still running? Come back Kish! Don't run from the truth!

You mean to tell me that your own Bible cannot live up to its own laws? What is the purpose of Deuteronomy 19:15 (as you interpret it) when it cannot provide witnesses to all these Biblical prophets. Poor Obadiah...Poor Amos...Poor Joel...All of these prophets have been left hanging by your own Bible! You know it's really bad when a Christian becomes so desperate to confirm the truth of his own holy book by using another holy book, which he doesn't even believe in! Ouch!

Originally posted by Kish

Selected amnesia I see. Show me where the Torah specifically said eyewitnesses,
since you feel it is necessary to change it from where it says
witnesses. On the other-hand Moses, Jesus, Paul and many others had
several eyewitnesses at a time.

Kish, use your brain. When the Torah speaks of witnesses in a criminal proceeding to testify that the accused person actually committed the crime, would they not be "eyewitnesses"?

Here is an example. The sin of apostasy was a capital offense. How would it have been proven if an Israelite had become an apostate? Would it not be through the testimony of at least two people that they witnessed with their own eyes this person worshiping an idol or heard with their own ears this person blaspheming God's name? How else would it be proven?

Originally posted by Kish

If only you can do the same with Muhammad using the sura’s in the Quran
and not the books of the hadith (Sahih) which is based on the alleged
traditions of men, an outside source that have divided the Muslim world.
Because that in itself makes the Quran incomplete!

Again, we see Kish's special pleading. Muslims use both the Quran and Sunnah. Get over it. I have given you the witnesses you seek. Where will you go from here?

But I have a surprise for you! The Quran does mention certain individuals who foretold the coming of Muhammad (pbuh)! And guess what? One of them is Jesus (pbuh)!

1. Abraham and Ishmael:

"And remember Abraham and
Isma'il raised the foundations of the House (With this prayer): "Our Lord!
Accept (this service) from us: For Thou art the All-Hearing, the
All-knowing. 128"Our Lord! make of us Muslims,
bowing to Thy (Will), and of our progeny a people Muslim, bowing to Thy (will);
and show us our place for the celebration of (due) rites; and turn unto us (in
Mercy); for Thou art the Oft-Returning, Most Merciful. 129"Our
Lord! send amongst them a Messenger of their own, who shall rehearse Thy Signs
to them and instruct them in scripture and wisdom, and sanctify them: For Thou
art the Exalted in Might, the Wise."" (2:127-129)

So, here we see that Abraham and Ishmael (pbut) had prayed to God to send a prophet to the Arabs. This prophet was Muhammad (pbuh). Therefore, Abraham and Ishmael were witnesses to the coming of Muhammad (pbut).

2. Jesus:

"And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: "O Children of Israel! I am
the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came)
before me, and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me,
whose name shall be Ahmad." But when he came to them with Clear Signs,
they said, "this is evident sorcery!"" (61:6)

And here we see that Jesus (pbuh) foretold the coming of Muhammad (pbuh), making him another witness. Alhamdulillah!

So, dear Kish, once again your question has been answered. Will you accept the truth now or will you close your eyes and deny it again? Remember...this is for your own good. You are not doing me any favors by accepting the truth. If you choose to accept it, it is for your own good. If you choose to reject it, it is to your own loss. If I was betting man though, I would wager that you will resort to your special pleading. Case in point:

Originally posted by Kish

As far as the legendary, fanciful stories of Bahira, Waraqah and Negus
which are of totally separate events in his life, well these are nice
bedtime stories I guess you can tell your children before they go to
sleep on how Muhammad in his early life talked with Christians and their
paradise gardens in heaven and how Muhammad had spots and moles on him
which was proof of him being a prophet.

That's our Kish! A walking pile of bias and special pleading! He wanted witnesses. He got them. And then, he denied them using his own authority.

Speaking of bedtime stories:

"As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him.4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”

5 “Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked.

“I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied.6 “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”

7 The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone.8 Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So they led him by the hand into Damascus.9 For three days he was blind, and did not eat or drink anything." (Acts 9:3-9)

Indeed, those who disbelieve -
it is all the same for them whether you warn them or do not warn them - they
will not believe. Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their
hearing, and over their vision is a veil.

How about that, another scripture from
the Quran stolen from the Bible, plagiarism at its best! 2 Cor. 4:3-5 . . .

3If,
now, the good news we declare is in fact veiled, it is veiled among those who
are perishing,4among
whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers,
that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the
image of God, might not shine through.5For
we are preaching, not ourselves, but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as ​YOUR​
slaves for Jesus’ sake.

This is exactly what Islam
does by saying things like . . .

Originally posted by islamispeace

. . . the Jesus of the Bible did not uphold the Law
of Moses, and neither did Paul.

How hilarious is your reasoning and belief when Jesus came
to fulfill the law, is without sin and himself personally appointed Paul, which
might I add are ALL part of the canon and authenticity of the Bible Scriptures.
Muhammad on the other hand plagiarized that account of Paul to himself but not
one person can confirm it, only legendary stories from the hadith, now that is
circular reasoning at its BEST! Whereas writers of the New Testament all
confirm each other with non-Christian Secular History backing it up.

Originally posted by islamispeace

Every time he is cornered, he makes up a
new argument! . . . he shifts gears and tries to deny the importance of the
hadiths . . .Regardless of your personal
opinions, the simple fact is that you asked for witnesses and you got them!

From the beginning you were asked to provide “witnesses”
from the Quran, what does Islam do, grabs support from the hadith and say I’m
shifting gears, “Hold The Phone!” And then goes on to say this . . .

Originally posted by islamispeace

. . .launch an attack on the Quran's "completeness".

My friend, if your book is “complete” as U say, you do not
need the hadith, it’s that simple. WithOUT, the hadith the Quran is INcomplete!

Originally posted by kish

Muhammad is expressly told to follow and judge
only by the inspiration which HE received, and what he received was the Quran
NOT the hadith:

And unto thee have We revealed the Scripture with the truth,
confirming whatever Scripture was before it, and a watcher over it. So judge
between them (Not the hadith) by that which Allah hath revealed, and follow not
their desires away from the truth which hath come unto thee… So judge between
them by that which Allah hath revealed, and follow not their desires, but
beware of them lest they seduce thee from some part of that which Allah hath
revealed unto thee… S. 5:48-49

And you say Islam = Submit to Allah. What is stopping you
now, or do U follow your Quran when it is convenient? Everything points to the
scriptures as truth NOT the hadiths or even the Quran for that matter. Allah is
here saying that he is a watcher over the scriptures. Did he watch over
the scriptures like he said he would or did he allow them to be corrupted? Either-way
there is a BIG problem here and you see it, I know U do. But, then again if they are corrupted how can
U judge between them as U are told, please read it again. See the dilemma;
I’m not your enemy.

Sometimes truth is hard to accept.

Originally posted by kish

. . . Say (O Muhammad): It is not for me to
change it of my accord. I only follow that which is inspired in me. Lo! if I
disobey my Lord I fear the retribution of an awful Day. S. 10:15

Hmmm, out of his own mouth, long story short nothing Muhammad
said the self-appointing messenger of Allah of the Kaaba and not Jehovah
the God of Israel is validated. No wonder Islam is so confused when it comes to
the Gospel and Torah and blame Jesus and Paul of the Bible. They are only
following what Muhammad and Ibn Khazem said. Where did Muhammad get his
information from, not the Lord Jehovah but from some spirit that violently
choked him until he gave in and then from some so called Christian monks, perhaps
anyone would have gave in and done the same under those distressing circumstances.

Originally posted by islamispeace

The Quran is instead concerned with
teaching Muslims the importance of believing in Allah (swt) and His messengers.

And not its message, that is the sad part. Muslims say they
submit but they are more concern with proving who the messenger was by using the
hadiths but failed terribly about hearing and believing the MESSAGE of the previous
“books” of the Bible the Holy Scriptures!

Originally posted by islamispeace

You don't get to tell us what we can and
cannot follow.

The Quran tells you to follow the previous scriptures and
that you do not follow either, what else can I tell you.

Originally posted by islamispeace

You best response was to try to
determine for Muslims what they can and cannot use. Unfortunately for
you, Muslims use both the Quran and Sunnah.

You can use the Veda and hadith if you like I’m not Muslim
and both are not part of the Bibles canon. Either way the Quran is incomplete
without it!

Originally posted by islamispeace

It's no wonder that you have been trying
to avoid answering my question about these prophets and who were their
witnesses.

Read page five of this thread and read Acts 9: 3-12 &
17-22 again. Luke, Theophilus who later became a Christian, Ananias and others accepted
the account as factual! No wonder NO ONE disputed the account that Saul/Paul
experienced as well as Jesus death. Peter, Barnabas and Jesus Apostles accepted
the account and his commission as an Apostle to the nations, which Muhammad
again plagiarized to himself.

Paul resurrects Eutychus in Troas in front of eyewitnesses (Acts
20:12), heals a man lame from birth and performed other miracles in front
of eyewitnesses (Acts 14:8-18),another proof of him being an
Apostle and Prophet of God. Paul prayed and laid his hands on the man, and
he was healed. Deeply impressed by this miracle, the local people brought other
sick ones to be healed, and they brought gifts to fill the needs of Paul and
his companions (Acts 28:7-10)

Ordinary men like Muhammad cannot do these
things but instead have to think up stories from the hadith which came after Muhammad's death to convince his followers that they really happened.

As you can see Paul had many witnesses even eye-witnesses to confirm his account and teachings during and after his death and that Jesus and God were backing him up!

Luke 1: 3,4 3 I (Luke) resolved also, because
I have traced all things from the start with accuracy, to write them in logical
order to you, most excellent The·oph′i·lus, 4 that you
may know fully the certainty of the things that you have been taught orally

Acts 1:1, 3 The first account, O The·oph′i·lus, I composed about
all the things Jesus started both to do and to teach . . . To these also by
many positive proofs he showed himself alive after he had suffered, being seen
by them throughout forty days and telling the things about the kingdom of God

Like it or not, no one can prove these events did not take place
because many eyewitnesses saw it and wrote about it and accepted it. The accuracy of the book
of Acts has been verified over the years by a number of archaeological
discoveries

Acts of Apostles was accepted without question as inspired
Scripture and canonical by Scripture catalogers from the second through the
fourth centuries C.E. Portions of the book, along with fragments of the
four Gospels, are found in the Chester Beatty No. 1 papyrus manuscript (P45)
of the third century C.E. The Michigan No. 1571 manuscript (P38)
of the third or fourth century contains portions of chapters 18 and 19, and a
fourth-century manuscript, Aegyptus No. 8683 (P8), contains parts of
chapters 4 through 6. The book of Acts was quoted from by Polycarp of
Smyrna about 115 C.E., by Ignatius of Antioch about 110 C.E., and by
Clement of Rome perhaps as early as 95 C.E. Athanasius, Jerome, and
Augustine of the fourth century all confirm the earlier listings that included
Acts.

More outside sources for your benefit not mines. - Irenaeus,
Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian recognizing the writings comprising the
Christian Scriptures as carrying authority equal to that of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Irenaeus in appealing to the Scriptures makes no fewer than 200 quotations from
Paul’s letters. Clement says he will answer his opponents by “the Scriptures
which we believe are valid from their omnipotent authority,” that is, “by the
law and the prophets, and besides by the blessed Gospel.”—TheAnte-NiceneFathers, Vol. II, p. 409, “The Stromata, or Miscellanies.”

As Paul’s associate, Luke recorded their travels. He also spoke to
eyewitnesses. These factors and thorough research make his writings a
masterpiece as far as historical accuracy is concerned.

Scholar William Ramsay could therefore say: “Luke is a historian
of the first rank: not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy, he is
possessed of the true historic sense . . . This author should be
placed along with the very greatest of historians.”

I don’t expect you to know, understand or accept any of this
since you was told not to and you blindly followed without doing your own
research but it was part of the bible canon long before Muhammad came on the scene.

All this was completed under great persecution from the Romans and
Jews and the Christians were very small in number but nothing is impossible for Jehovah,
the God of the heavens!

Originally posted by islamispeace

Who was the "angel" that
appeared to Mary to announce to her the birth of Jesus (pbuh)?

Are we going to go through all of the characters of the
Bible, it still would not convince you.

SO, before Muhammad can even past the test of a prophet he
first has to be a servant of the God of Abraham, Isaac AND of Jacob which he is
not, how do we know?

What have we found regarding Muhammad and his spurious
teachings thus far? The basic components are missing from the Quran that the Torah and Injil have to confirm each others written.

Six Major Points in Islam the Quran fails to
Mention

1)
The Quran does not mention that Ishmael was the child to
be sacrificed by Abraham

2) The Quran does not
mention that Muhammad was the promised seed of Abraham

3) The Quran does not
mention that a covenant was made with Ishmael by God

4)
The Quran
does not mention ONE person who witnessed, confirmed
or testified that Muhammad’s Revelation in the cave of Hi’ra was a TRUE event,
according to the Law of Moses.

5) The Quran does not
mention the God of Muhammad (Allah) as a father and having a son (Sura 4:171) as does the God of Jesus (YHWH/JHVH =
Yahweh/Jehovah) (Matt. 3:17)

6) The Quran does not mention God’s name as Yahweh or Jehovah as
did ALL the other books of the prophets in the Bible

If the God of Muhammad and of the Quran Allah, is not the
same God of the Holy Scriptures, Jehovah and of Moses how can Muhammad even
begin to past the test of a true Prophet.

"Our Lord! send amongst them a Messenger of their own, who shall rehearse Thy Signs to them and instruct them in scripture and wisdom, and sanctify them: For Thou art the Exalted in Might, the Wise." (2:127-129)

Kish,
your argument is going nowhere and it seems, with your long and meaningless posts, that your intentions are to just drag on until others get fed up and leave you alone with your absurdities which you claim as winning a point. That is plain stu---.
You are asking for a witness. There is no way that you can bring in a witness who can testify on the prophethood of Moses' Jesus' or any of God's true prophets of the OT. A witness mean someone who is alive and can testify. Similarly, it is not possible to bring in a living person from the time of the Prophet (pbuh). So your argument is plainly silly, and your efforts to put others down on this basis is insane.
So first come to your senses before asking anything. Because like this you only look like a looser.
Hasan

Edited by honeto - 02 January 2013 at 2:15pm

39:64 Proclaim: Is it some one other than God that you order me to worship, O you ignorant ones?"

There is no way that you can bring in a
witness who can testify on the prophethood of Moses' Jesus' or any of God's
true prophets of the OT. A witness mean someone who is alive and can
testify.

Unless you can prove otherwise, that is your opinion but the
Torah states that you need ‘two or more witnesses’ for any matter to be
establish as truth, be they an eye-witness or not. This has been the rule of
thumb throughout the Old AND New Testament, but not in your book. Testimony was
giving to Jesus and Paul’s message, it was acknowledged and confirmed by others
in the scriptures. But, no one can confirm Muhammad’s revelation in the Quran
only the hadith which by that time he was already dead to agree on anything
that was said about him. That being said, Islam, Muhammad and his Quran are the
first book for Muslims, fine. However, they have no connection with the God of
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob of the Old Testament just because Muhammad says so. There
is no connection with the Quran and the Gospel of Jesus because Muhammad acknowledges
it, it was already known history.

The way you worship Allah is entirely up to you. But, don’t tell
Jews and Christians that the God of the Old and New Testament is not a heavenly
father just because Allah of the Quran is not. That is NOT a Biblical teaching!
Most of the Quran is inconsistent if you are to compare it to the Bible, that’s
okay; the Bible is a book for Christians, the Quran for Muslims. It is going to
disagree on mostly everything essential to salvation.

I’m glad that the ‘two or more witness’ rule was put into
effect because many have tried to add legends and fanciful stories to the Bible
to contaminate it. But, the Bible canon was closed, completed and finished
after the end of the Apostle John’s writings, which was before 1 C.E. and
accepted as authentic by the Jews and Christians until many, many years later
after even Muhammad's death.

Jehovah God said he would preserve and protect it and he did.

If you disagree try and answer the "Six Major Points in Islam the Quran fails to
Mention" above

Sorry but I fail to see how you have convinced Kish of
anything. I know you believe it to the fullest extent yourself so proof is as
easy as an Arabic word, (most of which have many meanings). This looks like a
case of proving it to yourself over and over and getting frustrated when your
twos and two don’t make fours in the eyes of others. There are reasons for
that. In the same way you cannot convince me by your arguments that Paul was
not a Prophet.

Well, what a shock that a Christian feels that my arguments are not very "convincing"! I think that you are actually just projecting your own insecurities onto me.

Originally posted by Webber

Contradictory? One account mentions the companions heard but
did not see anything. (How’s your spiritual vision doing?) Another says couldn’t see anything, (possibly because of a bright
light?) Another says they fell to the ground. Do the first two accounts say
they did not fall to the ground? K, noticed the variations, missed the
contradictions. People like to mix them up lots.

This is a typical Christian apologetic argument, aimed at reconciling the differing detail in the three accounts.

The first account states that the companions did not see anyone and makes no mention of a bright light. The second account states that the companions saw a bright light. This certainly looks like a contradiction to me! Moreover, since you like to use the KJV, the contradictions are even more obvious:

"And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

8 And
Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no
man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.

9 And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink." (Acts 9:7-9)

This account says that the men heard a voice but no one.

"And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

10 And I said, What shall I do, Lord?
And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it
shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do.

11 And when I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of them that were with me, I came into Damascus." (Acts 22:9-11)

This account states that they saw a light but did not hear the voice!

Originally posted by Webber

This is an old Muslim criticism. All NT accounts must be
exact yet the 7 variations of the Quranic account of Sodom and Gomorrah should not be
questioned. It’s a double standard.

And this is an old Christian tactic: when in doubt, divert attention to an unrelated issue.

Originally posted by Webber

Clearly you are into the NIV and its updated opinions. Read
the KJV and you will note how Paul always separates God from Jesus. I suppose
nobody ever said Praise Allah and Muhammad in the same sentence before?

Using the same KJV, we see the contradictions in Acts regarding Paul's encounter.

Here is how the KJV translates 1 Corinthians 1:2-3:

"Unto the church of God
which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called
to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus
Christ our Lord, both their's and our's:

3 Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ."

There is little difference between the KJV and the NIV here. Both tell Christians to call upon the name of Jesus "their lord and ours".

Originally posted by Webber

Jesus said “Behold I come quickly” Jesus meant when He comes
it will be quick; Paul’s prophesy was not about “Cool, we’ll see ya tomorrow”
but about on the day it would happen. Where does Paul tell them they will all
live until that day? Wishful thinking I’d say and same for every generation
since that has sculpted the verses to believe it meant in their lifetime

Another typical response. Let's see the verses again:

"According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who
are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not
precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will come down
from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the
trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 After that, we
who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the
clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. 18
Therefore encourage one another with these words." (NIV, 1 Thessalonians
4:15-18)

"For this we say unto
you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto
the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

16 For
the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice
of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ
shall rise first:

17 Then
we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in
the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with
the Lord.

18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words." (KJV)

There can be little doubt what Paul is saying here. Christians can try to dance around it all they want, but it is clear that Paul was expecting Jesus' return within a short amount of time.

Originally posted by Webber

I find it odd you would use the words of another author, (John)
as an argument against Paul. On the surface they seem to agree, not contradict,
but it’s irrelevant to your argument. How did you miss that?

What's so "odd" about it? I referred to 1 John to prove further that the early Christians were expecting the return of Jesus in their lifetimes, just like Paul. Whoever wrote 1 John shared Paul's belief that Jesus was returning soon.

Originally posted by Webber

John’s talk was a warning based on the appearance of
anti-christs cast to the earth, which is what happened and remains even until
this “hour”.Not something Muslims want
to get into, they’d rather say it’s all about the Jinn.

John's "warning" was meant to tell Christians that the end was near. That is why he said "it is the last hour".

Originally posted by Webber

So what happens to a prophet that prophesies about the end
time that isn’t going to happen until the end time? Would you not want to put
them to death cuz it didn’t happen in your lifetime? John died of old age.

First of all, scholars generally agree that the author of 1 John was not "John". As Ehrman notes:

"The letters 1, 2, and 3 John sound in many ways like the Gospel of John, but they are strikingly different as well, especially in the historical context they presuppose. They were probably not written by the same author, who was not John the son of Zebedee in any event, but by a later Christian living in the same community." [Forged: Writing in the Name of God - Why the Bible's Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are, p. 229]

Second, the reason "John" was not killed for being a false prophet was because the letter was written anonymously. Also, this author was simply repeating the belief of the Christian community at large.

Anonymity was a common phenomenon in early Christianity. The number of anonymous writings in the New Testament is remarkable. As Ehrman notes:

"None of the Gospels tells us the names of its author. [...] Also anonymous are the book of Acts and the letters known as 1, 2, and 3 John. Technically speaking, the same is true of the book of Hebrews; the author never mentions his name, even if he wants you to assume he's Paul." [Ibid., p. 23]

Originally posted by Webber

These arguments are not your own. They are age old and
refuted many times. I would even venture to guess your training on this has
been more Google than from sitting and listening to your Imam.

Oh that's rich. "Googling" actually seems to be the main tactic of Christians such as yourself. I tend to rely on journals and books written by actual experts.

Originally posted by Webber

On the other side of the coin…Using the NIV in your
arguments will mess up a lot of “Christians” who do not know their own
scripture. ;)

You don't seem to know your scripture that well either, let alone whether it is the NIV or KJV, as I showed above.

Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

"And
when it is said to them, "Believe as the people have believed," they
say, "Should we believe as the foolish have believed?" Unquestionably,
it is they who are the foolish, but they know [it] not."(13)

Grow up and stop being foolish.

Remember
this, no matter how hard you try, you will never be capable of changing the believes of a true
Muslim. You can try and shake our foundation all you want, but in the end you'll only harm yourself. We are not the ones that have been deceived.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.